Tuesday's letters: Plenty of excuses

Published: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 at 4:30 a.m.

Last Modified: Monday, February 27, 2012 at 5:06 p.m.

To the editor: The logic of District Attorney Jeff Hunt is difficult to follow, and I could use some assistance. Mr. Hunt will disqualify himself from any investigation of wrongdoing by Sheriff Rick Davis because of his personal relationship with the sheriff. But he will not disqualify himself from ruling on the basic issue of whether there is any evidence of wrongdoing. Let’s see now, to prove his objectivity Mr. Hunt will not participate in any investigation. But he will use the power of his office to block an investigation.

“No evidence,” says Mr. Hunt, claiming that individual citizens must gather evidence and prove criminal charges. Heaven forbid that Mr. Hunt should take sworn testimony from female staff members, bookkeepers and deputies, and demand production of their documents. But from the facts already before him, he sees nothing illegal in using public funds to pay off a sex scandal, nor in using a county credit card to pay thousands of dollars of personal expenses. Hey, that’s just normal routine.

Excuses for the lack of corrective action in the sheriff matter are a dime a dozen — “We don’t have the authority,” “No real evidence exists,” and my personal favorite, “His accuser is a bum.”

Thomas W. Hill

Zirconia

Hill is a candidate for the Democratic nomination for the 11th District congressional race.

Christian faith

To the editor: I read David Brooks’ recent column on Jeremy Lin and the difficulty of a Christian playing pro sports and yet exhibiting Christ-like qualities of humility and putting others first.

The same, of course, goes for politics — only more so.

Many Christians want a “born again” believer in the White House, yet it is impossible for a true Christian to be president and still portray the qualities that characterize a follower of Jesus Christ. Bush was ballyhooed for his Christian faith, yet I can’t see Christ launching a pre-emptive strike on Iraq, whatever the “benefits” there may have been in that destructive event.

The decisions of the leader of a country must, by necessity, put the interests of the country first, regardless of the morality, or lack thereof, of his choices.

Robert Johnson

Hendersonville

Right environment?

To the editor: Although limited, there is an emerging literature regarding the economic implications on states that offer recognition of same-sex couples and on those that withdraw recognition. On his website www.law.unc.edu/faculty/directory/flattvictorb/, Victor Flatt, Thomas F. and Elizabeth Taft distinguished professor in environmental law, references “one reviewed white paper, prepared by Gary Gates at the Williams Institute at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) that finds that same-sex couples in the so-called ‘creative class’ which can contribute disproportionately to economic development, were more likely to relocate to a state (in this case, Massachusetts) after the extension of marriage rights.”

Gates found that “Creative class individuals in same-sex couples were 2.5 times more likely to move to Massachusetts in the three years after marriage equality than in the three years before.” Additionally, “Individuals in same-sex couples who moved to Massachusetts after marriage equality were younger than individuals who moved before — the average age fell from 41 to 29.”

North Carolina has outstanding schools for higher education, producing thousands of students entering the so-called “creative class.” Will passage of Amendment One create an environment in which these young people will desire to stay and work in North Carolina? I think not.

<p>To the editor: The logic of District Attorney Jeff Hunt is difficult to follow, and I could use some assistance. Mr. Hunt will disqualify himself from any investigation of wrongdoing by Sheriff Rick Davis because of his personal relationship with the sheriff. But he will not disqualify himself from ruling on the basic issue of whether there is any evidence of wrongdoing. Let’s see now, to prove his objectivity Mr. Hunt will not participate in any investigation. But he will use the power of his office to block an investigation.</p><p>No evidence, says Mr. Hunt, claiming that individual citizens must gather evidence and prove criminal charges. Heaven forbid that Mr. Hunt should take sworn testimony from female staff members, bookkeepers and deputies, and demand production of their documents. But from the facts already before him, he sees nothing illegal in using public funds to pay off a sex scandal, nor in using a county credit card to pay thousands of dollars of personal expenses. Hey, that’s just normal routine.</p><p>Excuses for the lack of corrective action in the sheriff matter are a dime a dozen  We don’t have the authority, No real evidence exists, and my personal favorite, His accuser is a bum.</p><p><em>Thomas W. Hill</em></p><p><em>Zirconia</em></p><p>Hill is a candidate for the Democratic nomination for the 11th District congressional race.</p><h3>Christian faith</h3>
<p>To the editor: I read David Brooks’ recent column on Jeremy Lin and the difficulty of a Christian playing pro sports and yet exhibiting Christ-like qualities of humility and putting others first.</p><p>The same, of course, goes for politics  only more so.</p><p>Many Christians want a born again believer in the White House, yet it is impossible for a true Christian to be president and still portray the qualities that characterize a follower of Jesus Christ. Bush was ballyhooed for his Christian faith, yet I can’t see Christ launching a pre-emptive strike on Iraq, whatever the benefits there may have been in that destructive event.</p><p>The decisions of the leader of a country must, by necessity, put the interests of the country first, regardless of the morality, or lack thereof, of his choices.</p><p><em>Robert Johnson</em></p><p><em>Hendersonville</em></p><h3>Right environment?</h3>
<p>To the editor: Although limited, there is an emerging literature regarding the economic implications on states that offer recognition of same-sex couples and on those that withdraw recognition. On his website www.law.unc.edu/faculty/directory/flattvictorb/, Victor Flatt, Thomas F. and Elizabeth Taft distinguished professor in environmental law, references one reviewed white paper, prepared by Gary Gates at the Williams Institute at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) that finds that same-sex couples in the so-called creative class’ which can contribute disproportionately to economic development, were more likely to relocate to a state (in this case, Massachusetts) after the extension of marriage rights.</p><p>Gates found that Creative class individuals in same-sex couples were 2.5 times more likely to move to Massachusetts in the three years after marriage equality than in the three years before. Additionally, Individuals in same-sex couples who moved to Massachusetts after marriage equality were younger than individuals who moved before  the average age fell from 41 to 29.</p><p>North Carolina has outstanding schools for higher education, producing thousands of students entering the so-called creative class. Will passage of Amendment One create an environment in which these young people will desire to stay and work in North Carolina? I think not.</p><p><em>Clay Eddleman</em></p><p><em>Hendersonville</em></p>